Sources said that had Beinisch urged the justices to rule on the appeals before the retirement of Justice Ayala Procaccia, who objected to the law, the majority of justices would have voted to revoke it.
Beinisch could also have replaced Procaccia with a justice who agreed with her, rather than with Neal Hendel, a religious judge who upheld the Citizenship Law, the sources said. Beinisch could have replaced Procaccia with Justice Uzi Vogelman, who sees eye to eye with her and has liberal opinions, or Justice Isaac Amit, the sources said.
If the paper had termed him "conservative" and also termed Procaccia as liberal, well, that would have been more acceptable. But maybe Amit or Vogelman is "religious", or "observant", too?
^
1 comment:
Excellent point. Neal Hendel's religious identification was irrelevant to his decision. There was no reason for Haaretz to bring it into the discussion except for their anti-religious bias and agenda.
Post a Comment